So I’m reading the newspaper this morning, when an editorial headline grabs my eye: “Rank Imperialism and Warmongering are not American Traditions or Values”. I could go off on another tangent about that rather questionable statement, but that’s something for Great Debates. My curiosity aroused, I read further. Without much surprise, I realize that the column is by Molly Ivins, who remains slightly to the left of, well, just about every living thing. Towards the end of the editorial, she makes this statement, in reference to Bush’s new defense strategy:
“It announces that we inted to go in and take out everybody else’s nukes (27 countries have them) whenever we feel like it.” (bolding is mine).
Now, the rest of the article is chock-full of dubious statements, but those are a matter of opinion. What I’m wondering about is, where does she get the statistic that 27 countries have nukes? As far as I know, the only countries with an admitted nuclear arsenal are the US, UK, France, Russia, China, Pakistan, and India. Israel is almost cetain to have some as well, but even then it’s only 8 countries. I figure that perhaps she includes South Africa, which built and then destroyed a few bombs, as well as Belarus, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan, in case she presumes they didn’t really give up all their nukes to Russia. Still, that’s only 12. So I add countries with nuclear research programs: Iraq, Iran, North Korea. Fifteen. Brazil, Argentina, and Germany have all had programs in the past. Eighteen. Maybe Japan had a program in WWII. Nineteen.
Is there any statistic at all that can be used to back up the statement that 27 countries have nuclear weapons?
(I also considered that she is not counting Israel, and the ‘2’ is a typographical error in front of what is meant to be ‘7’. But, Ivins doesn’t seem like the person to presume Israel doesn’t have nukes, in addition to the fact that 2 and 7 are nowhere near each other on a keyboard and, I presume, a printing press. Also, seven doesn’t seem like a number big enough to mention to obtain the effect she was clearly driving at, ‘there are so many nuclear-capable countries out there, thinking we can take care of them all is foolish’.)
FACT
The Nuke Club officially and for sure is the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China, India, Israel, Pakistan, and South Africa.
South Africa claims to have dismantled its program.
INFORMED SPECULATION
North Korea may have built one or two nuclear weapons before its most important nuclear facilities were “frozen” by the 1994 U.S.-North Korea Agreed Framework. As you note former USSR reps (like Ukraine and Kazakhstan) may still have Russian nukes in their territory but Russia controls them.
I believe both Japan and Taiwan have processed materials and can have a working nuke within months, as can North Korea if it doesn’t have a few stashed.
I can’t answer for Irvins though maybe she is referring to the 30 countries that have sought nuclear weapons? Many programs shut down in 1970 (by the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty) but the nine are the only ones positively known to have succeeded.
Here’s a great source on the history & the 30 suspected at one time of trying (Many are surprising to folks like Nigeria, Brazil, Spain ?)
http://www.isis-online.org/mapproject/world.html
Maybe she got it from here?
…of course the above info doesn’t jive with the context of the article, it just came up when I googled “how many countries have nukes 27”. There are a few other reports reflecting the statement that the US deployed nukes in 27 countries.
Hmm…Well, this list at fas.org lists 29 countries in it’s “Nuclear Forces Guide,” but this list seems to include countries that considered, but have long abandoned, a nuclear program, as well as countries that have a potential nuclear capability (i.e. Nuclear Power Plants, good technical resources), but no real inclination to acquire nuclear weapons. The latter includes countries like Australia and Sweden. I’m guessing that Molly Ivins either misread, or chose to misread, a similar list.
Ranchoth
But just for the sake of clarity, it’s your contention that Rank Imperialism and Warmongering Are American traditions and values ?
Thanks for the help everyone. I think Ranchoth and jimmy probably have it, with the figure including attempted programs and countries with a potential capability.
In a sense. To say ‘rank imperialism and warmongering’ might be too much of an overgeneralization, and I certainly wouldn’t use the word ‘rank’, but in my opinion America does have an established history of imperialist policy, just not in the strict sense as it is applied to the British empire. I think the history of US policy towards Latin Ameirca during the early 1900s, and the rather vague provocation for war with Mexico and Spain would be the prime cases in point.
I was always told Canada had once built some (or one) nuke but the project was scrapped. In fact I was surprised that Canada wasn’t even listed on the fas.org site.
I’ve always heard just the opposite: that Canada was the first country with the technology to create a nuke that refused to do so. it’s often painted as a part of the “noble Canadian spirit” and while there’s some truth to that, it really didn’t make a lot of sense for us to build them with the USA right below us. We’ve certainly got the infrastructure and resources if we had to.
There’s no need for Canada to spend the money developing nukes, because we live under the U.S.'s defensive umbrella.
If the U.S. somehow kicked us out into the cold, we could probably have a working nuclear bomb in a matter of months. We have all the technology, and lots and lots of fissile material available on short notice, since our breeder reactors can produce weapons-grade Plutonium.
Canada has deployed nuclear weapons in the past (Bomarc Missiles), but they were U.S. weapons.
Canada has never tried to develop a nuclear weapon. (My grandfather, father, mother, uncle and myself have all worked in the Canadian nuclear industry in the design end.)
Fact is, we could. We certainly have the industrial/technological infrastructure in place, including uranium ore reserves and a handy-dandy series of CANDU reactors to produce weapons-grade material. I can’t say the idea of my tax dollars being spent to construct and maintain nuclear weapons we can’t possibly use is a tempting one, especially with Canadian conventional forces perennial cash-strapped for helicopters and whatnot.
Since we have territorial claim at the North Pole, we could definately take the world hostage by threatening to nuke Santa.
I remember back in the late eighties/early nineties that Molly Ivins wrote a vitriolic hate piece in Mother Jones where she ranted at length about how anyone involved in genetic or biochemical research was by definition a Mengele/Strangelove genocidal maniac fueled by blind corporate greed. A few readers wrote to the editors to point out some of the drastic factual errors she made in the article, and Molly’s response was that she had a PhD in molecular biology (circa 1970) and was therefore entitled to spout any kind of whack shit that she wanted to about scientific matters.
In other words, she openly admits that she’s the Rush Limbaugh / Ann Coulter / Floyd R. Turbo / Ed Anger of the Luddite Left and it’s safe to ignore her.
I write this, by the way, as a knee-jerk leftist who really has a degree in molecular biology and doesn’t want to use it to enslave you. I just can’t help it if I have a problem with lying through my teeth about scientific facts, even if it supports my political agenda.
First we got the bomb and that was good…'cause we love peace and motherhood…
We don’t have nuclear power. Never have. We have one small reactor at Lucas Heights in Sydney used mainly for medical purposes, and a large demonstration at Narangba , north of Brisbane against a food irradiation plant.
Australians have always been fiercely anti nukes in any form
How about countries that used to be part of the USSR?
I included those in my first list, or at least the three that actually had any nukes deployed in them. Those were Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. Officially, all three of those countries have now returned their warheads to Russia and destroyed all missile silos and long range bombers.
Sorry to fog the rose tinted glasses but that is not correct.
Fortress Australia which was aired on 22nd August 2002.
Australian governments from the end of WWII up until the 1970s were concerned that the next world war would be nuclear and that Australia could not rely on either its main allies (the UK or USA) under these circumstances.
The Jervis Bay Nuclear Reactor Project, which could have enabled Australia to build as many as 30 nuclear weapons a year was scrapped in 1971 by Billy McMahon. Previous Prime Ministers Menzies, Holt & Gorton has sought to either procure UK weapons or to have Australian nuclear self-sufficient.
Many of the “advanced” countries like Canada, Aussie, The Netherlands and Germany to name a few are thought to be “ABLE” to build a device. They chose not to. For economic reasons (Canada) or political (The Netherlands)